eig

Does anyone know if there is a wallpaper collection of the winners of this competition over the years? Would love to make a slideshow of these images as my wallpaper.

While Clinical Trials are the most expensive step and have a 90% failure rate, it is not the *source* of the failures, it's just where failures are revealed.

Much of whether or not a candidate drug will succeed was determined all the way back in the design/discovery stage. If we can design better drugs, then we would enjoy a higher probability of success in the later clinical trials.

The single biggest improvement to pharma drug development would be from increasing the probability of success in clinical trials.

“ This is not the smoothness problem solution, but rather the Burgers vortex, an exact solution of the Navier–Stokes equations published by J. M. Burgers in 1948, chosen because it has the same anatomy: fluid drawn inward in a plane, stretched along the axis and thrown out of both ends, spinning fastest in a core.”

Funny to see that they did not include Fable 5 in their GeneBench and LifeSciBench comparisons because "it does not answer advanced biology questions and refuses the majority of questions in this eval".

Winner by default!

I presume all the Foundation AI companies have been doing this for years, to avoid training models on their own generated data?

The microbubbles in scuba diving that cause the bends are the ones trapped in joint space fluid. That fluid doesn't circulate at a useful rate, so unfortunately you can't really "burst them somewhere else" =(

This is a great puzzle game. I think it actually teaches the concept of "piece coordination" in chess very well.

One suggestion is to have all enemy pieces move simultaneously. I expected that the losing condition is that I am threatened and there are no unthreatened squares to move (checkmate).

However, since the opponents move one-at-a-time, I found that even if I moved to a safe square, sometimes I could be both threatened and captured in the same move! Which is somewhat different from normal chess, since now you have to consider the possible orders in which the opponents move. So even moving to unthreatened squares could be a game over.

In real-life, before the election there is a margin of error on the support of a bloc.

If you interpret a "tie" in this game as "either party could win within the margin of error", then it becomes a lot closer to solving the problem that gerrymandering algorithms try to solve in real life!

The game stores and allows you to see the RNG seed that controls the run's events and layout. The developers want players to be able to share seeds that produce interesting runs.

That requirement is what made this problem difficult for the devs to solve.

The only reason I think biotech companies are not yet raising hell (and invoking the False Claims Act) is that Thermo Fisher's antibodies are already known to be notoriously bad, and everyone serious seems to have to validate everything themselves.

I'd treat this about the same as datasheets for mechanical or electrical parts.

When I buy an electronic component as a regular consumer I expect the datasheet "typical" values to be accurate 90% of the time. I can imagine larger industrial customers would really raise a stink if it's worse than that. However, any critical components in my circuit must be verified and "binned", and that's on me.

In case people don't realize, this is satire.